Snow is on the decline. Polar vortex is on the rise. Snowmageddon is a distant memory. The terms the major networks use to describe weather events have had their ups and downs over the years.

As the world embraces the inevitability of climate change, most of us can expect more drastic weather events and with it more dramatic terminology. However, these dramatic terms also come as news networks compete for viewers’ attention and the marketing of these events becomes about increasing KPI’s as well as conveying the latest updates.

In 2014, a number of scientists were up in arms over the Weather Channel’s decision to name storms, which many felt was a marketing choice over a scientific one.

“I'm sorry, but naming winter storms is a meteorological disgrace and only leads to confusion,” text In an wrote meteorologist Steven DiMartino. Similarly in 2020, some criticized the network’s branding of a hurricane during the pandemic as “COVIDCANE 2020”.

More recently, a number of pieces and op-eds have been written on the increase in dramatic terms used by outlets. Jim Duncan from The Washington Post wrote in February, “over the past few years, an onslaught of frightening-sounding weather words and phrases has accompanied nearly every major weather happening.” Another columnist from the Toronto Star wrote, “Stop with the ‘bomb cyclones’ and the ‘thundersnow’ — the world is scary enough without alarmist weather words.”

I wondered whether these observations were rooted in reality or possibly just recency bias after the latest storm coverage. In an analysis of data from the TV News Archive, I looked at how three major networks — CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC have described weather events since June 2009. Out of 28 terms describing the weather, some trends rose to the surface.